Interviewed on MSNBC last week, former White House press secretary Scott McClellan said Fox News pundits and commentators ‚Äúwere useful to the White House,‚ÄĚ stating that they were given ‚Äútalking points‚ÄĚ to repeat on air:

Q: Did people say call Sean, call Bill, call whoever? Did you do that as a regular thing?

McCLELLAN: Certainly. Certainly. It wasn‚Äôt necessarily something I was doing, but it was something that we at the White House, yes, were doing.

On his radio show yesterday, Bill O‚ÄôReilly let loose on McClellan, calling him a ‚Äúliar‚ÄĚ and an ‚Äúidiot‚ÄĚ for saying O‚ÄôReilly accepted the talking points. Today, McClellan went on O‚ÄôReilly‚Äôs show and in a tense back and forth, O‚ÄôReilly got McClellan to apologize for the ‚Äútalking points‚ÄĚ statement. ‚ÄúDo you owe me an apology?‚ÄĚ O‚ÄôReilly asked. McClellan responded:

McCLELLAN: The truth is I messed up. I was specifically not trying to single anyone out, including you. But the way a couple of the questions were phrased in that interview along with my response left things open to interpretation and I should not have let that happen. ‚Ä¶ I understand why you got upset. ‚Ä¶ You‚Äôre the Big Kahuna at Fox News, and some people tried to paint in a black and white term through a preconceived notion.

Despite McClellan‚Äôs apology, O‚ÄôReilly yelled at McClellan later in the segment, blaming McClellan for getting ‚Äúplayed‚Äô by Chris Matthews and accusing him of being a ‚Äúliar‚ÄĚ and ‚Äúcrazy‚ÄĚ:

O‚ÄôREILLY: Matthews played you. ‚Ä¶ He played you! You should be mad at him!

McCLELLAN: So you don‚Äôt owe me an apology for calling me a liar? ‚Äď

O‚ÄôREILLY: You are a liar! You said I received talking points and I didn‚Äôt!

McCLELLAN: No I didn‚Äôt! I was not confirming that. I‚Äôm telling you right now ‚ÄĒ

McClellan, however, did stand by his original point. ‚ÄúI stand by what I said in terms of the larger things and everything.‚ÄĚ Without pointing out specific names or networks, McClellan vaguely claimed: ‚ÄúThere were other people that were friendly and sympathetic to us.‚ÄĚ

So I don't know what to think, the guy changes what he says based upon the audience and the wind or something. Thus he doesn't come across as being all that credible.

Eugene Robinson said last night on MSNBC he got talking points from the WH as well.
The issue is not getting the talking points, as I'm sure they send out to most everyone in the mass media, it's incorporating them into the fabric of the programming.

Roger Ailes is a friend to the RNC. That doens't mean he can stick a puppet hand up Bill O'Reilly and force him to do anything. So it's a nice plausible deniability. I have no doubt O'Reilly is his own man, he writes all his own shit, he's the perfect vehicle to knock down this charge.

Let's see what Shaun Hannity or Brit Hume would have to say about it.
What about the leaked memos that have come out over the last few years?

There was a hack documentary called 'Outfoxed' that was released and rather than stick to facts, of which they had some of those memos and some testimonial evidence, they bled over into Michael Moore territory of disengenuous editing and intellectually dishonest 'reporting'. So, they gave FOX the perfect opportunity to knock it down.

Because just putting up the memos and these other things, that just wouldn't have made for a good piece of propaganda all by itself.

The backbone of FOX news is in the tank for the Republicans, there is no question about it but when loonies invent things or make outlandish charges (like Congressman Wexler calling them racist) it just gives them a cushioned defense against legit critcism because they only defend themselves against the whackos and their charges.
"See they are whackos!!!!"-Bill O'Reilly. Allowing them to ignore the evdience of bias.

I'd also say, that while MSNBC has ruined it's objective credibility, mostly throughout the Democratic primary, I don't believe that it's a network agenda to push policy, I just think they have a lot of liberals. There is a difference. Olberman and Matthews are liberals, they are and have been clearly in the tank for Obama but like O'Reilly and Hannity they are just opinion merchants.

It's in the news reporting where the bias should be unacceptable.
I don't see a clear bias from MSNBC in reporting the news, just in the opinions.
When I watch FOX and I do from time to time, it just bleeds out of the screen.

Look at Monica-gate. Every network, CNN, MSNBC, FOX, even including the Daily Show, rode that shit to the ground. Endless sensationalist coverage. I think most sane people can agree that all these networks care about is ratings. They'll put something on the air that is sensational, from Anna Nicole and the latest white girl abduction to tornadoes and hurricanes. FOX will target the right, MSNBC will target the left, CNN will target sensationalism at all times, basically.

Nothing in the last 8 years has been more sensational, viewer-tastic, than the Bush implosion. Yet, there is FOX News, undeterred, pumping out the sunshine. How does that not reveal their true colors moreso than anything? They barely fucking cover anything that might be construed as negative towards Bush. There is a difference between not piling on and not even clueing in. Yet, something like Jeremiah Wright brings out the sensationalist stripe in FOX. CNN, MSNBC covered that as well, in hoardes. And that is the difference.